: 1 ~\ ! I I .,!
BLACKSMITHING AT GEORGE WASHINGTON'S MOUNT VERNON:
1755-1800
By
Dennis J. Pogue Director of Restoration
Mount Vernon Ladies' Association Mount Vernon, Virginia 22121
May 1995
------INTRODUCTION
From the earliest days of English settlement in the New World,
blacksmithing was an indispensable and ubiquitous occupation. The
repair and fabrication of iron tools, farm implements, horse equipage, and domestic items was a constant need that in
preindustrial America could only be performed by skilled craftsmen.
At George Washington's Mount Vernon plantation, the blacksmiths
also carried out more varied tasks such as repairing the works for
the grist mill, fabricating replacement parts for guns, and even
making a plow according to Washington's own design.
In New England, most villages were serviced by one or more
blacksmiths. In the South, where dispersed settlement on
plantations and farms was the norm, smiths were likely to have a more widespread clientele. Not all farms, or even all large plantations, could afford to employ a smith full-time to cater
solely to its needs. It was more likely that one of the wealthier land owners would set up a shop at his plantation, which also took in work from the surrounding neighbors. In this way the requirements of the home plantation were satisfied, while providing income to defray the costs of the operation and bringing in some much needed ready cash as well.
The Mount Vernon Ladies' Association has had a long-standing interest in documenting the craft of blacksmithing at Mount Vernon.
Archival records from as far back as 1755 indicate that the blacksmith shop played a crucial role in the overall success of the plantation. Yet no blacksmith shop exists today. It is natural,
1 therefore, that over the years the Association has endeavored to gather as much evidence as possible regarding blacksmithing at Mount Vernon, and in particular on the site of the shop itself. A significant body of documentary evidence indicates that at least by 1755 a smith's shop was located along the north lane near the existing ice house (Figure 1). Archaeological investigations were carried out in that location beginning in 1936, which verified the existence of the smithing site. Additional work was conducted over the years -- in the 1950s and 1960s, again in 1984-85, and finally in 1987-88. The goal of each of these excavation campaigns was to document the shop remains to assess whether sufficient evidence existed to enable its authentic reconstruction. The particular importance of archaeological data in this context is a result of the lack of written descriptions or detailed graphic evidence pertaining to the shop.
As a result of combining the disparate archaeological findings with the documentary and graphic evidence, the most recent analysis has produced a relatively detailed depiction of the plan of the site and of the associated work areas. Along with an interpretation of the types and range of activities carried out by the Mount Vernon smiths, the resulting portrait serves as a case study of 18th-century blacksmithing. As virtually no blacksmith shops from this period survive today, this type of evidence is crucial in attempting to interpret this important colonial craft.
2 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
The documentary evidence pertaining to the blacksmith shop on
the north lane includes accounts of the activities of the smiths,
George Washington's diary entries and letters, and other plantation
records. In addition, a structure labelled as a shop is depicted
on the 1787 Vaughan plan (Figure 2), and a building in this
vicinity is included in a painted view dating to circa 1792 (Figure
3) • These depictions are the only ones known to exist. The
location of the blacksmith shop near the extant ice house has been corroborated by the archaeological research.
The first known mention of a blacksmith shop at Mount Vernon
dates to 1755, when a workman was paid "for buildg a Chimney in my
Smith's shed." In combination with several subsequent references,
it seems beyond doubt that this shop was located on the north lane
in the area studied. A blacksmith shop is not included in the 1753
inventory of Lawrence Washington' s estate, but "5 large Smiths
files" are listed. The reference to erecting a chimney in the
"shed" in 1755 does not preclude the possibility that this activity
was a repair to a shop that was in existence by 1753. The last
reference that can with confidence be associated with the shop in
this location dates to the year 1793. A "Black Smiths Shop" is
listed in the 1800 inventory of the contents of Mount Vernon,
however, and its placement in that listing suggests a location on the north lane. Further, blacksmithing activities are documented as continuing uninterrupted at least until the fall of 1798, with no indication of constructing another shop or abandoning the one
3 on the north lane.'
Archaeological evidence points to two shops in this location,
and the documentary record supports this finding. On January 16,
1768, Washington recorded that on that date workmen "Finished my
Smiths Shop -- that is the Carpenters work of it," suggesting that
the shop being worked on in 1755 may have been completely
replaced.' That a new shop was built only 13 years later in turn
suggests that the earlier shed had been built by Lawrence
Washington. It is not known when the north lane shop ceased
operation, but the evidence of the inventory enumerated in 1800
indicates that it was still in existence at that time. The
existing ice house that overlies the footprint of the blacksmith
shop is shown for the first time in 1855, when it is depicted on a Currier and Ives plan (Figure 4).
Activities:
Several sources combine to indicate that George Washington made a substantial investment in his smithing operation in 1755.
This was most likely in preparation for the many significant alterations to the estate that he was planning to implement over the next several years. In addition to extensive repairs to the structure itself, or possibly even constructing a new shop at that time, Washington purchased a relatively complete set of blacksmith's tools. Washington ordered the tools in January 1755, contracting with two local individuals to procure the items at a cost of L10.15.3 The complete list included:
4 One Large pair Bellows, One Large Vice, One Small D., One pro Tongs old Iron, Three Broad Files, Three Square D., One Tool for making large Nails, One D. for making small, One Anvil, Two Sledge Hammers, One Hand D., One large Screwdriver, One Small D., Two pair Tongs, One Tool for forming the Eyes of Axes, Two Cleve Irons.' In general, the items ordered by Washington for his shop represent standard blacksmithing equipment of the day. The anvil, bellows, and vices were basic items required to establish any smithy. The hammers, tongs, files, and screw drivers are equally unremarkable and would have been used in a wide variety of applications. It is uncertain what function was performed by the "cleve irons," although one definition of cleve (cleave) is to part or divide along the grain, or between parallel fibres, by a cutting blow.' This implies that the irons could have been a special tool, possibly an anvil insert, used to split iron stock. The only other objects intended for a specialized purpose are two "tools" (nail headers?) for making nails, and the single "Tool for forming the Eyes of Axes."
The inventory of blacksmithing tools taken in 1800 is almost identical to the listing from 45 years earlier: In Black Smiths Shop-- 1 New Bellows $15.00 1 Anville 4.00 2 Vices 8.00 1 Buck Iron 2.00 4 Hammers 2.00 6 pr Tongs 2.00 4 Rasps -- old .50 3 Screw Plates 1.50 5 Nail moulds .50 Some Old Iron 2.00 1 Scotch Plow 4.00' Once again, this list is unremarkable in most respects, generally
5 including the minimum equipment required for a rural smithy. In the absence of the tool used in making axes that was listed in
1755, the only specific activity indicated is nail making. The presence of the "scotch plow" suggests that it was undergoing repair at the time the inventory was taken.
Only a few entries in the smithing accounts indicate other tool purchases. A significant exception to this occurred in 1759, however, when six dozen "Smiths files of different sorts" were ordered from England. That Washington implemented a system to guard against theft or misuse of tools similar to that in use elsewhere on the plantation is indicated by the record of one of the smiths being required to return an old file before he was issued a new one. In 1795 two "Cross cut saw files" were disbursed to the smiths, along with one leather apron each. Finally, in 1797
Washington purchased a sledge hammer along with a new bellows and a v~ce.• 7
In her study of blacksmiths in Kent County, Maryland,
Christine Daniels found that the average cost for a basic set of smith's tools during the period before the American Revolution was
L15. 12• This figure seems to have been inflated by the specialized nature of the work carried out by many of the smiths operating in
Chestertown at that time. By the early 19th century, the average cost had declined to L6.6, apparently reflecting the less specialized smithing then being practiced as the result of the decline of Chestertown as a commercial center." The LIO.12 paid by
Washington for his tool kit, therefore, falls well within this
6 general range. The Mount Vernon plantation accounts include hundreds of references to the blacksmiths' activities over the period from 1755 to 1799. Most of these are notations of payments to the "Smiths Accts," some of which specify the service rendered. Others record expenditures for the purchase of tools and materials. It is clear that the Mount Vernon smiths undertook work for nearby residents, as well as supported the plantation operation. The types of jobs undertaken, and the number of times performed, are listed below: Activities (15) Instances (33) Shoeing horses 8 Repairing/sharpening a plow 5 Making a hoe 4 Repairing/making horse shoes 2 Making a plow 2 Making an axe 2 Mending a frying pan 2 Repairing a wagon 1 Making keys 1 Making a hammer 1 Making "loom irons" 1 Making pot hooks 1 Making a fire shovel and tongs 1 Repairing a gun 1 "Mill work" 1 The list of the activities of the Mount Vernon smiths corresponds well with those for rural smiths on the Eastern Shore. Working on plows, repairing chains and other metal work, and shoeing horses were the three most common tasks at rural shops in Maryland, and are similarly prevalent in the Mount Vernon accounts. Making and repairing tools, mending pots and pans, and gunsmithing round out the top six occupations in Kent County,' with each of those activities also included in the Mount Vernon list. More
7 unusual work undertaken by Washington's smiths includes "mill work," presumably repairing iron work in Washington's grist mill, and making nails. No specific references to nail making have been revealed, and abundant orders for buying nails over the years indicate that the vast majority of the nails used at Mount Vernon were purchased. But the presence of the tools for making both large and small nails included in the 1755 tool kit and the "5 Nail moulds" listed in the 1800 inventory, along with the purchase in 1782, and again in 1785, of "Faggots of Nail Rods," suggests that at least some nails were made there.10 Another more unusual task which the Mount Vernon smith was asked to perform was to assist George Washington "in making a new plow of ••• [Washington's] ••• own invention. ,,11 It is not known whether or not this experiment in plow design was successful. The smith who was pressed into service for this project was Peter, a slave, who is included in the Fairfax County list of tithables for Mount Vernon as a blacksmith in the years 1760-63, then as a "tradesman" from 1764 to 1770. A second slave, named London, also is listed as a blacksmith in 1760-62 and presumably acted as
I Peter's assistant. ' The change from listing slaves by their specific occupation to the more generic designation of "tradesmen" introduces a level of uncertainty in identifying the smiths during the period from 1763 to 1774. Three slaves (Nat, George, and GUy) are listed directly below Peter in the 1763 listing, however, suggesting that
8 they were London's replacements. Guy is not named the next year, but Nat and George continue to be listed below Peter until 1769.
George is listed along with Peter in 1770.13 Peter is not included among the Mount Vernon slaves for the year 1771, and a new smith, a "Dutch" journeyman named Dominicus
Gubner (also Hovenor), took over the blacksmithing duties. Gubner was employed on a temporary basis for 19 days in 1770. In
September of that year he agreed to serve under a one-year contract, at the rate of L32 per annum. This agreement was renewed twice at the same rate of pay, with his last contract expiring in
October 1773. It is not known what happened to Peter, but his complete absence from the tithables list suggests that he may have died. The slave, George, continued to be included as a "tradesman" in the tithable lists for the years that Gubner was in residence.
The list for 1774, the year after Gubner's departure, again includes George, but also names Nat, presumably the same slave who had also assisted Peter up until 1770.14 The apparent departure of Peter is the obvious reason for hiring Gubner. But possibly he was intended to serve two related functions -- as Peter's replacement in the short term, but also to teach Peter's assistants, Nat and George, in the finer points of blacksmithing so that they could take over the operation. Hiring journeyman craftsmen to work for a period of time, and at the same time to teach his slaves how to perform the craft in question, was a standard strategy employed by Washington over the years. Whether
Gubner also was hired in an attempt to improve the overall
9 operation of the shop, or to make it more remunerative, is a
possibility that cannot be determined at this time. Whether Gubner
was more skilled than earlier or subsequent smiths also is
difficult to determine. Few jobs that he performed are specified
with any detail in the accounts, but they did include making "two
keys," "a new Broad axe," and a hoe.15
Nat and George served as the Mount Vernon smiths from the time
of Dominicus Gubner' s departure in 1774 at least until George
Washington's death in 1799. They are listed as such in both of the
slave censuses, in 1786 and in 1799. In January of 1788 George
Washington responded to an offer by a friend to provide him with
a blacksmith by characterizing his smiths as, "tho' not very neat
workmen, [they] answer all my purposes in making farm utensils,
etc., in a plain way." Two years later he sounds less satisfied,
complaining that "My bumbling smith, has lamed one of the Horses
that draw the Waggon in shoing him." Finally, in 1792 Washington
observed that "the Smiths ••• I take to be two very idle fellows."
The next year he discreetly began to search for a replacement for
Nat and George, seeking "a compleat Blacksmith" who must also be
"an honest, sober, and Industrious man.""
Apparently George Washington was unable to find such a
paragon, and Nat and George continued as the Mount Vernon smiths
for the remainder of Washington's lifetime. Once again, the
accounts provide little indication of the specific tasks Nat and
George performed. However, mundane jobs such as mending plows,
shoeing horses, mending horse shoes, and repairing wagons, are
10 named. A more ambitious project is the apparent attempt in 1791 to carry out repairs to the grist mill, but in his letter referring to this event Washington did not know how successful it was. 17 The fact that six years later Ll. 7 was paid to "Carver & Hall, Smiths" for "mending Mill spindle"l. may indicate that Washington's smiths were not up to such specialized work. Similarly, in 1784 Washington paid an outside blacksmith "for Neckg Gudgeons for the Mill, 2 1/2 days in his own shop."a Several other projects appear to have been jobbed out to other smiths during this period, including paying Lund Washington for his smith to repair a harrow, and "For Smiths worke done In towne to cart." In 1771, during Dominicus Gubner's tenure as head smith, the shop accounts record a payment of L10.12 to the blacksmiths working for the merchant firm of Carlyle and Dalton of Alexandria.'· The specific work performed for George Washington by the Carlyle and Dalton smiths is not mentioned, but that firm appears to have run a relatively extensive smithing operation. When John Dalton died in 1777 the firm was broken up, and an advertisement in the Maryland Gazette in April of that year offered a selection of company assets for sale. This included: "eight NEGRO men; six of them good smiths, and have served regular times to the trade; they do all kinds of ship and planters work, shoe horses, &c. one understands a good deal of gun work and making nails. ,,'1 George Washington's displeasure at contracting for blacksmithing services with outside craftsmen is well documented. When the harrow was sent out to be repaired by Lund Washington's
11 smith, George Washington remarked that, "this ought not to be; nothing should go there that my own Smith's can do; and for the
Harrows I suppose they are competent. ,,22 In 1794 Washington ordered his plantation manager at that time, William Pearce, to close his account with Lund Washington, reiterating that, "unless there is an absolute occasion for it, do not run me to the expence of smiths work there, or elsewhere, in future. ,,23
Materials: Another important source of information regarding the activities of the Mount Vernon smiths are the accounts documenting the acquisition of raw materials and fuel -- iron, steel, and charcoal or coal. References to purchases of iron are plentiful in the smith accounts throughout the 45 years of the shop's operation. Up until the mid-1760s it appears that the scale of activities was limited enough to make it possible to obtain sufficient stock locally from a combination of "old iron" supplied by neighboring landowners and bar iron from Alexandria merchants. Washington did purchase "2 Tonns" of iron in 1759 for L44.12.3, and
2 received two other comparably priced shipments in 1761 and 1763. ' Few references to "old iron" are listed after 1767 and Washington's orders of stock are more regular and more expensive beginning in the mid-1770s and continuing up until his death in 1799. "Old iron," bar iron, and undifferentiated "iron" are the most common materials named, but Washington's requirements became more specific over time. In 1778 Washington purchased steel for the
12 first time, 50 pounds of it for L10, and in 1782 "2 faggots Nail Rods" at L4.4.25 In 1797 he received two mixed orders of metal, including bar iron, sheet iron, rod iron, and steel. At least one of these shipments came from Ph.i.Lade.Lphd.as" The Mount Vernon smiths may have been forging Philadelphia materials as early as 1792, moreover. In that year Washington wrote to his plantation manager, Anthony Whiting, "As I can get Iron cheap, if not cheaper here [Philadelphia] than it is obtained in Alexandria, send me the sizes of the Bars, plates, &ca. which you would have to compose a
Tonn. ,,21
In 1783 Washington paid Andrew McCarty Ll.16 in return "for being 12 days with the Blacksmiths instructing them to Burn Cole. ,,2. While this reference may indicate that the Mount Vernon smiths were learning to use coal to fire their forge, it seems more likely that they were being taught how to make charcoal, often referred to at that time as "burning coal." The significant length of time involved (12 days) supports the latter interpretation. Unfortunately, few other references to the type of fuel used have been found, and two of the four citations refer simply to "hauling coal for the Smiths." The other two refer to "hauling Smiths Coal wood. ,," The reference to "Coal wood" may indicate the raw material intended to be burned to produce charcoal. Both charcoal and coal were used as fuel by blacksmiths in the 18th century.3. Unfortunately, the sparse documentary evidence gives no additional clues if or when coal replaced charcoal in use at the Mount Vernon smithy. Both coal and charcoal were excavated
13 from 18th-century contexts at the blacksmith shop site, however, indicating that both were used there to some degree.
Clientele: The accounts for the smith shop list individuals who paid for services, and appear to be relatively complete for the period from 1760 to 1779. For the next 20 years the entries are sketchier, but also indicate that fewer jobs were being performed for those living beyond the bounds of the Mount Vernon plantation. During the 1760s and 1770s the Mount Vernon blacksmiths appear to have served a steady clientele of neighbors, one of whom patronized the shop over a span of 25 years, with at least 10 individuals each listed for more than a 12-year span. George Fairfax, of neighboring Belvoir plantation, was the most faithful customer, paying for services for 11 of the 16 years spanning his patronage. A total of 134 individuals are listed in the smith accounts for the period 1755 to 1799. The smith accounts for the years 1755 to 1759 are sparse, but as of January 1, 1760, a total of 51 individuals are listed as owing money for services rendered. Given the date of entry, this list presumably includes all those who had yet to settle their accounts from previous years. An additional eight entries are recorded for the remainder of the year, probably giving a truer indication of the number of clients who patronized the shop for those 12 months. The total number of individuals listed in the shop accounts
14 for the period 1755 to 1760 is 61. Reference to "An Interpretive
Historical Map of Fairfax County, Virginia in 1760," prepared by
Mitchel1,31 has made it possible to locate the likely place of residence for 31 of those individuals. As might be expected, most of the patrons were found to live nearby, with 22 of the 31 (71%) residing within a five-mile radius of the blacksmith shop at the
Mount Vernon Mansion House Farm. If the eight new customers listed in 1761 are included in this calculation, the pattern of proximity is strengthened. Five of the eight are within the five-mile radius and the other three are just beyond it (Figure 5).
That the customers who patronized the Mount Vernon smithy were from nearby supports the assessment of Daniels, based on her study of blacksmiths in Kent County, that planters were unwilling to travel far to obtain basic services such as blacksmithing. 32 A blacksmith shop was in operation at Gunston Hall plantation, just six miles south of Mount Vernon, during this period.33 References in the Mount Vernon accounts to paying outside smiths for specific tasks indicate that a number of other smiths were operating in the county, as well as in Alexandria, seven miles away. The five-mile radius around Mount Vernon may, therefore, represent the effective share of the market available to Washington's smithing operation in relation to competing shops. It is interesting that two of
George Mason's tenants who lived on land near Mount Vernon used
George Washington's blacksmith, even though Mason operated his own shop at Gunston Hall, only a few miles farther away.
Landowners (42%), leaseholders (32.2%), and tenants (25.8%)
15 ..------
all patronized the Mount Vernon blacksmith, with eight nearby
plantations (those of William Clifton, George Mason, Sampson
Darrell, Thomas Marshall, Harrison Manley, Daniel French, John
Posey, and George Fairfax) in addition to Mount Vernon, forming
the nucleus of the shop's clientele in 1760-61. On the other hand,
at least five individuals who paid the Mount Vernon smiths for work
resided 10 miles away, and one man, William Waite, lived in
Alexandria, seven miles distant. Four of these men patronized the
shop just once, however, with the other two calling only twice.
In contrast, all of the 10 individuals who called on the Mount
Vernon smiths over a span of at least 12 years lived within the
five-mile radius, once again demonstrating the importance of
relative proximity.
Reference to the study of blacksmiths on the Upper Eastern
Shore of Maryland for the period 1700 to 1810 provides an
opportunity to compare the activities of the Mount Vernon smiths
with an independent data set. For a six-year period around 1750
at least 15 blacksmith forges operated in Kent County." These were
found to fall into three categories according to location -- urban,
suburban, and rural -- which had a significant impact on the
activities they undertook. Not surprisingly, urban smiths carried
out more specialized tasks -- such as carriage repair, tool making,
and "ornamental work" -- for their affluent and presumably more
style conscious clientele. Evidence for urban smiths carrying out
these more specialized tasks also exists for several shops in
Williamsburg.35 On the other hand, suburban and rural smiths were
16 more closely tied to plantation life and were more likely to spend their days sharpening and repairing plows and other agricultural
3 equipment, shoeing horses, and mending pots and pans. ' Although 134 individuals patronized the Mount Vernon shop from 1755 to 1799, virtually all of them are listed in the years prior to 1779, with the great majority before 1770. This apparent decline in the number of customers from beyond the plantation is strongly correlated with the growth of Mount Vernon. Washington embarked on a systematic campaign of land acquisition beginning in earnest after his return from the French and Indian War (Figure 6). Over a five-year span in the early 1760s Washington more than doubled his land holdings, from approximately 2300 to 4800 acres. Among the tracts he acquired were the very plantations that had supplied many of the customers for his blacksmith shop -- Sampson Darrell's (1757), William Clifton's (1760), and George Ashford's (1762)• Following a hiatus in land buying necessitated by his growing indebtedness, Washington then purchased another 3000 acres, including the plantations of John Posey (1769), John West (1770), Thomas Marshall (1779), Daniel French (1786), and Harrison Manley
(1786) .37 All of these property owners, and some of their tenants as well, had been steady customers of the Mount Vernon blacksmiths. One result of the expansion of Mount Vernon was to incorporate much of the neighborhood heretofore serviced by Washington's smiths into the plantation itself. Therefore, the total number of potential outside customers for the Mount Vernon smithy was considerably reduced. But probably of equal or even greater
17 importance was the fact that the smithing activities required to support the expanded plantation increased dramatically. By 1779
Mount Vernon was a complex, multi-functioning plantation system composed of five farms, a grist mill, a fishery, and numerous other craft operations. That the Mount Vernon smiths undoubtedly had to devote much more of their time to servicing those needs naturally would have meant less time for outside work.
The entries in the blacksmith accounts for the period after
1779 reflect the more internalized focus of their work. From 1779 to 1799 no more than four individuals are listed as customers of the shop in any given year. The overall number of entries for blacksmithing declines as well, presumably because work performed for the plantation was not systematically recorded. In 1792
Washington directed his plantation manager, Anthony Whiting, to make sure that "a regular account" of the smiths' activities was made on a daily basis. While the reason that he gives for this directive is "to see that the Smiths do their duty, ,,3. it appears to have led to more systematic record keeping in general.
Beginning in 1794, the smiths accounts typically include specific entries for each of the five farms and for the mill.
While it is possible to gain a sense of the general level of activity of the blacksmith shop over the years, only in January
1798 does Washington total the shop's expenses and income for a year's time. According to this accounting, the expenses for the year 1797 were L94.16.6, with total income at L129.9.4, and a net
"profit" of L34.12.9. The expenses are not itemized in this
18 listing, but entries in the account books indicate that they include the purchase of two shipments of steel and iron, totaling approximately L90, and a new bellows, vice, and sledge hammer for
L8.8. with a single exception, the income was derived from tasks carried out on the plantation and charged to the various farms, the mill, the distillery, and to the carpenters." Since this is an accounting of internal transactions, Washington did not realize a profit in the sense of actual income, as he may have earlier when the shop had a clientele beyond the plantation.
ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS
Structural evidence for the shop, along with artifacts related either to blacksmithing or to the domestic use of the space, were revealed. The shop remains include a fragmentary brick foundation, probably four by eight-feet in dimension when whole, that is interpreted as the base of a forge. The foundation has a void in the center, with one wall thicker than the others (Figure 7). This is characteristic of forge bases, with the void marking the location of the fire box and the thicker wall supporting the chimney.·o Evidence for where two posts were located, marked by the post holes and the 8-inch round molds of where the posts sat, also was revealed. They are 18 feet apart, and are situated square with the forge base, suggesting that they are the corner posts for the structure covering the forge. Unfortunately, the shop's other dimension is impossible to discern because of the disturbance of that portion of the site.
19 In addition to the shop posts, two other sets of post holes apparently relate to fencelines that connected with those two corners of the structure. Two post holes are spaced nine feet apart and running in line with the shop's northeast corner, and probably are the remnants of a post and rail fence. Several post holes with square molds were found in line beginning just south of the other corner, spaced six feet apart, and apparently enclosing a yard adjoining the shop and opening onto the north lane. That fenceline turned and ran along the lane and connected with the north dependency (Figure 8).
A fenceline that conforms extremely well with the archaeological evidence is depicted on the 1787 Vaughan plan of the estate. Vaughan shows a structure identified as the blacksmith shop in the area studied and the fence adjoins its southeast corner, just as indicated by the archaeological evidence. The blacksmith shop measures 12 by 40-feet on this somewhat stylized plan, but it is depicted as approximately 18 by 24-feet on the earlier sketch that Vaughan made while visiting Mount Vernon.
Since the archaeological evidence also points to an 18-foot north- south dimension, then the 18 by 24-foot size seems more likely.
The resulting picture of the blacksmith shop is of a modest structure, supported by posts set directly into the ground, around which a wooden frame, siding, and shingled roof were erected
(Figure 9). Such buildings were commonly used in the colonial
Chesapeake, and especially for outbuildings in this period. The adjoining fenced yard would have served as a handy general work
20 area, especially useful for repairing large items such as wagons
and carriages, and bulky agricultural equipment. Great quantities
of coal, slag, and other refuse were found within the yard area,
testifying to the common practice of the day of disposing of
rubbish, even messy materials such as smith's waste, very near
their source.
Obvious smithing waste was recovered from the two holes
thought to mark corner posts for the shop. Therefore,
blacksmithing must already have been undertaken nearby when those
posts were set. As a reference from 1768 indicates that extensive
carpentry work was then done on the blacksmith shop," it is
possible that a second shop was built at that time. The waste
found in the post holes supports that likelihood. Therefore, the
building for which the archaeological evidence was found appears
to have been the second shop in the area, probably built in 1768
to replace the one presumably built by Lawrence Washington. No
structural evidence for an earlier shop has been identified.
Blacksmithing Artifacts:
A substantial quantity and impressive variety of artifacts
were recovered via excavations carried out at the blacksmith shop
site. These include domestic objects such as ceramics and glass,
some of which may be associated with the probable use of the shop
as a residence for the various smiths. The greatest volume of material relates directly to the smithing operation. This includes waste products such as slag, ash, fuel, and discarded metal
21 objects. The latter consist primarily of iron, with a small amount of copper and brass. The iron includes fragments of blacksmithing and other tools, trim and scrap by-products from iron working, agricultural implements, domestic objects such as kettles and padlocks, both structural and agricultural hardware, horse shoes, horse shoe nails and other horse furniture, and gun parts. The smithing tools include several files, two steel hammer face fragments, and chisels. Evidence for some of the smiths' activities consists of unfinished gun parts -- a trigger and two breech plugs -- several fragments of plows, including two colter feet from bar share plows that probably were discarded when the plow was cannibalized for reusable metal, and pot fragments. The horse shoes and numerous other horse equipage testify to farriering and the maintenance of harness, rolling stock, and farm implements (Figure 10). While relatively little copper alloy material was recovered, a brass door lock with several pieces clearly having been snipped off points to the repair of some brass work. On the other hand, no nail rod, unfinished nails, or nail headers were recovered. This negative evidence correlates with the documentary data to suggest that nail making was not a significant undertaking of the Mount Vernon smiths.
CONCLUSION The combined evidence for the activities of the Mount Vernon blacksmiths thus testifies to a wide variety of tasks that are indicative of the rural location of the shop and the predominantly
22 agricultural orientation of its clientele. Repairing farm tools, maintaining rolling stock, and mending a wide range of domestic implements were the normal tasks asked of Nat and George, as they were of Peter and Dominicus Gubner before them. As such, the evidence for the Mount Vernon smithy correlates well with the pattern for the types of activities carried out by rural Maryland shops revealed by Daniels.
The dramatic shift from answering the needs of the surrounding community to an overwhelming focus on servicing the expanded Mount
Vernon plantation seems more likely to be a natural development rather than a conscious decision. As with virtually all large plantations of its day, Mount Vernon required enormous outlays in labor and other resources to keep it operating. Over time the
Mount Vernon smiths appear to have taken on an ever greater burden in providing support for the increasingly diverse occupations undertaken.
23 FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of the site of the Mount Vernon blacksmith shop.
Figure 2. Vaughan Plan of 1787, showing the location of the Mount
Vernon blacksmith shop.
Figure 3. Painting from circa 1792 depicting the Mount Vernon
smiths shop (center, partly obscured by a tree).
Figure 4. Ice house on the site of the blacksmith shop, depicted
on the Currier and Ives plan of 1855.
Figure 5. Probable places of residence for customers of the Mount
Vernon shop, 1755-61 (customer names circled, five-mile radius
indicated) •
Figure 6. The growth of Mount Vernon.
Figure 7. Brick base of the forge revealed at the Mount Vernon
smiths shop.
Figure 8. Plan of the Mount Vernon blacksmith shop site.
Figure 9. Artist's rendering of how the Mount Vernon blacksmith
shop may have appeared, viewed from the northeast.
Figure 10. Horseshoe, horseshoe nails, and a fragment of a hammer
head recovered from the site of the Mount Vernon blacksmith
shop.
24 NOTES
1. Ledger A 1750-74 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), p. 20; Inventory of the Estate of Lawrence Washington (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1753), p. 7; John C. Fitzpatrick (editor), The Writings of George Washington Vol. 32 (U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1939), p. 299; W.K. Bixby (editor), Inventory of the Contents of Mount Vernon (Privately printed, 1909), pp. 48-49; Farm Ledger 1797-98 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia). 2. Donald Jackson and Dorothy Twohig (editors), The Diaries of George Washington Vol. II (University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, 1976), p. 36. 3. Ledger A 1750-74, MVLA, p. 13. 4. Superior Galleries Auction Catalogue (Privately printed, 1992), p , 76. 5. Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1982)• 6. Bixby, Contents, pp. 48-49. 7. Invoices and Letters 1755-66 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), p. 175; Store Book 1787 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia); Store Account 1795 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), pp. 113-114; Farm Ledger 1797-98, MVLA, p. 47. 8. Christine Daniels, "Wanted: A Blacksmith Who Understands Plantation Work: Artisans in Maryland, 1700-1800," William and Mary Quarterly Third Series 50, no. 4 (1993):760-762. 9. Daniels, "Plantation Work," pp. 759-760. 10. Orlando Ridout, References to Nails Used at Mount Vernon (Unpublished report on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1994); Ledger B 1772-93 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), pp. 169, 186. 11. Jackson and Twohig, Diaries 1976, Vol. I, p. 255. 12. Fairfax County Tithables 1760-1771 (Transcribed copy on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia). 25 13. Fairfax County Tithab1es, MVLA.
14. Ledger A 1750-74, MVLA, p. 325; Jackson and Twohig, Diaries 1976 Vol. II, p. 275; Fairfax County Tithables, MVLA. 15. Ledger A 1750-74, MVLA, p. 309; Ledger B 1772-93, MVLA, pp. 43, 76. 16. Jackson and Twohig, Diaries 1978, Vol. IV, p. 278; Fitzpatrick, Writings 1940, Vol. 37, p. 256; Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 29, p. 356; Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 31, p. 160; Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 32, p. 279; Fitzpatrick, Writings 1940, Vol. 33, pp. 105-106.
17. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 32, p. 374. 18. Farm Ledger 1797-98, MVLA, p. 22. 19. Accounts JK&LW 1774-86 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), p. 138.
20. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 31, p. 339; Farm ~edger 1794- 96 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), p. 158; Ledger A 1750-74, MVLA, p. 347.
2l. Maryland Gazette 1777, p. 3.
22. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 31, p. 339. 23. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1940, Vol. 43, p. 5l. 24. Ledger A 1750-74, MVLA, pp. 69, 143, 167. 25. Ledger B 1772-93, MVLA, pp. 152, 169. 26. Farm Ledger 1797-98, MVLA, p. 9.
27. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 32, p. 183. 28. Accounts JK&LW, MVLA, p. 121. 29. Farm Accounts I 1797-98 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia), pp. 90, 95; Weekly Reports 1789-91 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia); Weekly Reports 1792-94 (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia). 30. John D. Light, "The Archeological Investigations of Blacksmith Shops," Industrial Archeology 10, no. 1 (1984):55-68.
26 31. Beth Mitchell, Fairfax County, Virginia in 1760: An Interpretive Historical Map (Office of Comprehensive Planning, Fairfax County, Virginia, 1987).
32. Daniels, "Plantation Work," p. 750.
33. Terry Dunn (transcriber), the Recollections of John Mason (Copy of unpublished transcript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia).
34. Daniels, "Plantation Work," pp , 750-751.
35. Gregory J. Brown, Thomas F. Higgins, III, David F. Muraca, S. Kathleen Pepper, and Roni H. Polk, Archaeological Investigations of the Shields Tavern Site, WilliaJllBburg, Virginia (Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Department of Archaeological Research, 1990); The Blacksmith Shop in Eighteenth-Century WilliaJllBburg (Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, 1978).
36. Daniels, "Plantation Work," pp. 750-751.
37. John Rhodehamel, "The Growth of Mount Vernon," Mount Vernon Ladies' Association Annual Report (1983), pp. 18-24.
38. Fitzpatrick, Writings 1939, Vol. 32, p. 279.
39. Farm Ledger 1797-98, MVLA, pp. 9, 48. There is a discrepancy of more than L4.0 between the annual expenses for the shop given by Washington and the total produced by adding the individual expenditures listed in the smith accounts.
40. Donna C. Hole, Forge Construction in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (Unpublished manuscript on file, Mount Vernon Ladies' Association, Mount Vernon, Virginia, 1981).
41. Jackson and Twohig, Diaries 1976, Vol. II, p. 36.
27